NixOS Foundation - Public Room Timeline

	NixOS Foundation	461 Members
	Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board	116 Servers

Load older messages

Sender	Message	Time
11 Mar 2024
MangoIV	https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixos-foundation-board-open-board-meeting-2024-03-20/41209/2?u=mangoiv I hope that’s fine with you?	21:32:27
MangoIV	Alright. I guess that’s a yes and I can cross post it.	21:37:09
@theophane:hufschmitt.net	That was a yes indeed	21:39:17
	Shalok Shalom left the room.	22:07:40
samueldr	In reply to @samueldr:matrix.org Given that the NixCon NA team goes against the precedent from taking a specific controversial sponsor, I am asking that the NixOS Foundation and/or NixCon EU team distanciates themselves from the NixCon NA team, and furthermore, it would be nice if they'd ask for them to pick a name reflecting their distance from the community. Still looking for words about this	23:32:29
delroth	In reply to @samueldr:matrix.org Still looking for words about this is the fact that the Foundation specifically approved the sponsor not the answer? they're likely not going to distance themselves from NixCon NA if they're who made the decision... (the NixCon EU question is maybe more relevant for NixCon EU organizers than this room)	23:36:58
samueldr	one can change their opinion	23:37:14
samueldr	I would prefer the foundation answers, rather than guesstimate given previous actions	23:38:00
samueldr	(and yeah, I posted it elsewhere that has and had less text volume than this room, for the NixCon EU peeps)	23:41:31
12 Mar 2024
	samrose joined the room.	08:18:43
infinisil	Since it's also relevant here: https://nixos-users-against-mic-sponsorship.github.io/	13:33:31
ronef	Update: we have the biweekly board today in 45 minutes, added it Will summarize and share	14:14:28
ronef	https://discourse.nixos.org/t/community-calendar/18589/119?u=ron We will be holding the open board call tomorrow 16:00 UTC	22:24:43
ronef	If I missed a channel where this is relevant please feel free to share there	22:25:10
@theophane:hufschmitt.net	In reply to @ronef:matrix.org If I missed a channel where this is relevant please feel free to share there I'm sharing on the couple of relevant discourse threads	22:26:56
13 Mar 2024
	Rob Vermaas (he/him) joined the room.	05:26:40
	K. Werty joined the room.	18:28:38
Janik (they/them)	In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org Since it's also relevant here: https://nixos-users-against-mic-sponsorship.github.io/ ~25% of all nixpkgs contributions in the last two years where done by people who signed the letter: Calculatet using the diff between: base and involves	09:13:01
K. Werty	People can't seriously be even considering accepting a sponsorship from a military drone manufacturer.	18:31:01
Janik (they/them)	In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org Since it's also relevant here: https://nixos-users-against-mic-sponsorship.github.io/ * ~25% of all nixpkgs contributions in the last two years were done by people who signed the letter: Calculatet using the diff between: base and involves	09:13:25
Janik (they/them)	* ~25% of all nixpkgs contributions in the last two years were done by people who signed the letter. Calculatet using the diff between: base and involves	09:17:01
delroth	In reply to @janik0:matrix.org ~25% of all nixpkgs contributions in the last two years were done by people who signed the letter: Calculatet using the diff between: base and involves Your base should probably exclude r-ryantm fwiw	10:13:46
Janik (they/them)	removing r-ryantm from the equation (by appending `-involves:r-ryantm` to the query) results in `92992` total prs and `26766` prs done by people who signed the letter, which is roughly 29% of contributions.	10:23:30
Arian	In reply to @janik0:matrix.org removing r-ryantm from the equation (by appending `-involves:r-ryantm` to the query) results in `92992` total prs and `26766` prs done by people who signed the letter, which is roughly 29% of contributions. I'm not sure how valuable this metric is. I'd consider myself pretty active contributor to NixOS but not to nixpkgs. Work on more deeper things that move slower (e.g. systemd; how NixOS boots, certificate renewal, AWS support). I only have 55 PRs that I ever merged but I'd still call myself an active part of the community. I think package maintainers will have way more pull requests than people like me. it might give a skewed view of how active the community is	10:53:55
Arian	Me signing that letter or not signing that letter makes no dent in the metric at all.	10:54:37
Arian	I still think it has some value. it shows that people signing it aren't just "random people". they're a core part of our community. but i don't know if we can use it as a representative metric in any way	10:55:42
Arian	* I still think it has some value. it shows that people signing it aren't just "random people". they're a core part of our community. but i don't know if we can use it as a representative metric in any way apart from that	10:55:50
Arian	That there are active core contributors opposed to a certain sponsor could of course already be enough reason to drop such a sponsor. it isn't some representative vote.	10:57:43
Janik (they/them)	Yeah I agree, metrics like this are always hard and I'm not someone doing a lot of data-science. All I wanted to show with this is that it's not just a small minority of random people, but people that are fairly involved with the project.	11:00:25
patka	In reply to @arianvp:matrix.org I still think it has some value. it shows that people signing it aren't just "random people". they're a core part of our community. but i don't know if we can use it as a representative metric in any way apart from that I don't think we will use it for much (because like you say it's not too useful). But if anything we can use it for the silly comments on Discourse saying "I hope these people are not a mob of rando's stating "war bad"". Although we should just ignore those completely, probably.	11:05:54

There are no newer messages yet.

Back to Room ListRoom Version: 10